Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 49

Thread: 2nd Person Check/ Quality Check

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    36,992

    Default

    COs would work whatever their normal hours are, whether they're assigned to processing cases or doing 2PCs.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    291

    Default

    So apparently Erin has talked to INZ about this and asked went some are taking 2 days and others 4 weeks. They have said they do get done chronologically, so first in first served. However there's 2 exceptions to this rule:

    Talent visas are checked quickly
    If your CO is new they check quickly

    Seemingly the reasons are talent visas likely need less checks so can be expedited, the new co rule is to make sure the co is making the right calls and gets their feedback promptly before they make more mistakes and to ensure they are told what they are doing is correct while it's fresh in their mind.

    So similar to how erratic the behaviour was with random applications being granted a CO for training purposes it's again hard to know if you will be checked quickly without asking your co how long they've been doing the job.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    New Zealand (ex: South Africa)
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deverett View Post
    Seemingly the reasons are talent visas likely need less checks so can be expedited, the new co rule is to make sure the co is making the right calls and gets their feedback promptly before they make more mistakes and to ensure they are told what they are doing is correct while it's fresh in their mind.
    Both are well-intentioned reasons, in my opinion. Getting the easy ones out of the way means (in theory!) greater capacity to deal with the more intensive checks, and getting feedback promptly to the newer Case Officers can result in better and more efficient decision making in the long run. That said, INZ is developing a track record of getting even the most well-intentioned changes horribly wrong, so I'm not holding my breath...

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelerei View Post
    Both are well-intentioned reasons, in my opinion. Getting the easy ones out of the way means (in theory!) greater capacity to deal with the more intensive checks, and getting feedback promptly to the newer Case Officers can result in better and more efficient decision making in the long run. That said, INZ is developing a track record of getting even the most well-intentioned changes horribly wrong, so I'm not holding my breath...
    It's another case of good intentions and a reasonably well thought out concept, but zero communication. In the same vein as why do some people get pulled out the queue, well it's because that case had a very particular criteria a team member needed training and experience with.

    Had they just said these things people wouldn't be over analysing wondering why did this person jump the queue. With the delays people were trying to find commonality behind the randomness and we would never know that it's because this CO needed someone who ticks this box or their work needs validating. It really wouldn't kill them to say in the operations manual or on the processing times page here's a few reasons why they can select applications out of sequence.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    46

    Default

    When your application is in the queue for quality control, is there already a decision from your CO right? could I ask the call centre about it? Would they know the decision of the CO? Thanks

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    244

    Default

    @benz yes there should be a decision already. However it depends on the contact centre person you talk to whether or not they share it. IDK if there’s an actual process standard to share or not to... I personally thought that the result should not be shared until it passed 2pc, but apparently some people when they called ICC said “pre-approved”.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allune View Post
    @benz yes there should be a decision already. However it depends on the contact centre person you talk to whether or not they share it. IDK if there’s an actual process standard to share or not to... I personally thought that the result should not be shared until it passed 2pc, but apparently some people when they called ICC said “pre-approved”.
    Thanks for the info. I'm just worried coz after a week I sent the evidences she asked it went to the quality control queue. DOn't know if it approve or not.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    36,992

    Default

    The COs aren't supposed to tell the applicant that they are approved. There is a very solid reason for this. The whole point of second-person checking, also known as quality control, is to look for errors or omissions, and to guard against the possibility of corruption, on the part of the CO who has worked the case. So nothing CAN BE final until the 2pc official has agreed that the CO has worked the case properly and has sound reasons for his/her decision. Suppose the CO tells the applicant, 'Yes - you're approved,' the applicant might take life-changing decisions on that basis, then the 2pc official found mistakes meaning the approval wasn't justified after all... Or suppose the CO tells the applicant, 'It's a refusal,' the applicant likewise might take life-changing decisions (like leaving the country), then the 2pc official found mistakes meaning the case should have been approved... THAT's why people don't (shouldn't) get to hear their outcome until ALL the work has been done. 2pc isn't a little nothingy extra on the end of your waiting time - it is an official obligatory part of INZ's process.

    benz, no, you don't yet know if you're recommended approval or not, and that's how it ought to be. HOWEVER, the CO wouldn't have sent the case to 2pc so quickly after arrival of that paperwork unless she felt sure of her ground on all the rest. And if she thought there was something about your situation that looked bad, she would have sent you a PPI messsage (potentially prejudicial information), telling you what thing looks as if it doesn't fit the regulations so you would need to be refused, giving you a chance to give extra evidence or explanations. As you didn't have that PPI message, it's a sign that things look good, BUT you have to wait for the 2pc official to check.

    (This "pre-approved" that some people have been told doesn't make sense to me. All cases HAVE to be second-person checked, and the 2pc official COULD find a mistake and send back any one of them.)

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JandM View Post
    The COs aren't supposed to tell the applicant that they are approved. There is a very solid reason for this. The whole point of second-person checking, also known as quality control, is to look for errors or omissions, and to guard against the possibility of corruption, on the part of the CO who has worked the case. So nothing CAN BE final until the 2pc official has agreed that the CO has worked the case properly and has sound reasons for his/her decision. Suppose the CO tells the applicant, 'Yes - you're approved,' the applicant might take life-changing decisions on that basis, then the 2pc official found mistakes meaning the approval wasn't justified after all... Or suppose the CO tells the applicant, 'It's a refusal,' the applicant likewise might take life-changing decisions (like leaving the country), then the 2pc official found mistakes meaning the case should have been approved... THAT's why people don't (shouldn't) get to hear their outcome until ALL the work has been done. 2pc isn't a little nothingy extra on the end of your waiting time - it is an official obligatory part of INZ's process.

    benz, no, you don't yet know if you're recommended approval or not, and that's how it ought to be. HOWEVER, the CO wouldn't have sent the case to 2pc so quickly after arrival of that paperwork unless she felt sure of her ground on all the rest. And if she thought there was something about your situation that looked bad, she would have sent you a PPI messsage (potentially prejudicial information), telling you what thing looks as if it doesn't fit the regulations so you would need to be refused, giving you a chance to give extra evidence or explanations. As you didn't have that PPI message, it's a sign that things look good, BUT you have to wait for the 2pc official to check.

    (This "pre-approved" that some people have been told doesn't make sense to me. All cases HAVE to be second-person checked, and the 2pc official COULD find a mistake and send back any one of them.)
    Thanks Jandm. I'll just wait patiently and pray harder😊 hope for the best.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    46

    Default

    When I called INZ, they said it seems like the 2PC is complete and was sent back to CO. I asked if its rework or has decision and they said its not stated there. What does this mean??

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •